Topic: Omni mic comparison: please listen to two samples (of same material)

[illconditioned]

OK, as some of you may know, I'm on the lookout for the best sounding Omni capsules.

Here are two samples, please listen, tell me which you like best, and *why*:
  http://Soundmann.com/2008-04-02-JillBarber_clip_mics1.mp3
  http://Soundmann.com/2008-04-02-JillBarber_clip_mics2.mp3

Basically, if you could take home this tape today, which mics should I wear.  Both are hat mics.  The placement and recording gear is a bit different, but I want to know about the mics.  Go ahead and use whatever descriptive words (warmth, detail, transparency, whatever) you wish.  But in the end, which one do you like best?

  Richard

[Dede2002]

Sample 2 sounds better to my ears. Sound is more open and clear. What more can I say? 

[illconditioned]

Sample 2 sounds better to my ears. Sound is more open and clear. What more can I say? 

OK, great.  Keep the comments coming.  After a while I will disclose what gear is being used...

  Richard

[tfrench]

Sample 2 sounds better to my ears. Sound is more open and clear.

I second source #2.  Source #1 sounds kinda dull/muffled in the vocals.

Todd

[DaveG73]

I didn't read the comments until after I listened but I am gonna go with #2 also. Sounded a little more "transparent" and "clear" and seemed to cut out the chatting crowd more.

#1 I preferred the keys on. It seemed to have a slightly "dirtier" sound that I always love on piano.

Either way she has a great voice.

Dave.

[itook2much]

#1 seems dull compared to #2.  #2 is much more "detailed" to me, better highs & the bass (a stand-up?) stands out much better.

Who is it?  Great voice, great song.
EDIT:  Duh, it's right there in the mp3 link. 

Cute too.

[illconditioned]

#1 seems dull compared to #2.  #2 is much more "detailed" to me, better highs & the bass (a stand-up?) stands out much better.

Who is it?  Great voice, great song.

It is Jill Barber, a Canadian (Toronto based) singer-songwriter.  Yeah, I really like her voice.  I'll be posting a full clip at Soundmann.com shortly.

  Richard

[digifish_music]

The stereo image of #1 and #2 are different. #1 is more centered and #2 is has be bit more separation. The whole sound-stage in #2 is slightly shifted to the right. Particularly the vocalist and banjo. This exposes the audience on the left a bit more.

It's almost like #1 is a stereo pair in-front of the stage and #2 is back a little further and more widely spaced.

digifish

[drewloo]

#2 sounds a bit more 'like you're there' to me.

[illconditioned]

The stereo image of #1 and #2 are different. #1 is more centered and #2 is has be bit more separation. The whole sound-stage in #2 is slightly shifted to the right. Particularly the vocalist and banjo. This exposes the audience on the left a bit more.

It's almost like #1 is a stereo pair in-front of the stage and #2 is back a little further and more widely spaced.

digifish

That's true, the images are a bit different.  As I said earlier, I'm more interested in the sound/flavor of the mics.  This is as close as I could get to a fair comparison given that some beer was consumed during the experiment .

  Richard

[illconditioned]

OK, I've just reloaded #2.  EQ applied to make it flat, at least closer to #1.

Nothing is ever flat, though, as they are both mounted (flush) on my hat, at at different places, lol.

Thanks again.  Mics will be identified in a bit...

  Richard

[setboy]

Sample 2 sounds better to my ears. Sound is more open and clear.

I second source #2.  Source #1 sounds kinda dull/muffled in the vocals.

Todd

what they said.

[Jimna]

#2

[mblindsey]

Sample 2 sounds better to my ears. Sound is more open and clear.

I second source #2.  Source #1 sounds kinda dull/muffled in the vocals.

Todd

I concur...#2.

--Michael

[stirinthesauce]

I know which is which 

Sonic signature of both mics.  I'll reserve my speculation though until Richard posts.

[illconditioned]

I know which is which 

Sonic signature of both mics.  I'll reserve my speculation though until Richard posts.

Actually, you probably *no not* know what they are.  They are not your usual suspects (Nevaton, etc).
But, please do tell me which one you like.

  Richard

[stirinthesauce]

pm forthcoming

[run_run_run]

I like #2

[Dede2002]

What gear was being used?
The waiting is killing me 

[newplanet7]

I like #2

yep

[Gutbucket]

Posting to mark this thread until I get home to listen..  Trying not to read the previous posts..

[stirinthesauce]

Posting to mark this thread until I get home to listen..  Trying not to read the previous posts..

yeah, that might throw one off.  I relistened a few times.

[Sunday Driver]

Clip 2 "sounds" better. The reasons have already been covered.

However, Clip 1 for some odd reason sounds more "real", as if I am there listening to the music.

[Gutbucket]

To me, sample 1 has a sort of midrange emphasis which provides a nice clarity to the spoken voice & makes the piano stand out to my ear.  Applause impulses are more rounded sounding not overly sharp.  Once the music starts it sounds a bit compressed and a little harsh in the high mid range.

Sample 2 is more extended at the bottom and the top, with less of a mid emphasis.  The bass whump is a tad strong during the applause.  I tend to like a clear transparent airiness at the top (perhaps exaggerated) and that preference sways me toward this sample.  I also like deep extended omni low end, yet this sample might have bit more than I'd prefer in a perfect world (see disclaimer).  I notice the clarity of the guitar and the transparency of the voice in this sample vs. the presence of the vocal and piano in sample 1.  I vote for 2.

Disclaimer- I often find that my own 'I am the mic stand' omni recordings are often a bit bass heavy and need some bass reduction or could stand some mid clarity 3kHz-ish boost (somewhere around the range where sample 1 has a bit much).  Small placement changes on a hat or glasses seemed to change the resonances dramatically for me and that of course could be the case here so take my comments with a gain of salt.  I prefer other 'I am the mic stand' placements for my own recording because of that that give me more consistent results. The preference  for the top end of sample 2 wins regardless.

Thanks for the samples Richard, I'm always interested to give these comps a listen.  Going back to read others impressions..

Lee

[Gutbucket]

Well, going back it seems like everyone likes 2.  unanimous.

OK, I've just reloaded #2.  EQ applied to make it flat, at least closer to #1.

Nothing is ever flat, though, as they are both mounted (flush) on my hat, at at different places, lol

LOL, sounds alot like the disclaimer in my post.

[SmokinJoe]

I agree with #2 as well.  In the beginning with the talking and clapping I prefer #1, but when you go to the music about 2 minutes in, #1 sounds almost muddy, and #2 is clean and crisp.

[Outrageous]

Clip 2 "sounds" better. The reasons have already been covered.

However, Clip 1 for some odd reason sounds more "real", as if I am there listening to the music.

I agree.  That sums it up for me too.

[intpseeker]

Yup. #2. More clarity.

JB is pretty cool, as well.

[illconditioned]

OK, now comes the time to disclose my "sources":

Source #1: Sennheiser KE4-211-2.  Omni capsule, 5mm diameter, gold mylar diaphragm.  I believe this is similar to the Sennheiser MKE2 lav capsule, but without the "sweat" barrier, and seems smoother too.  Hrtf, mounted right above the ears.  Some windscreen material in front.  Mics have 2.2k mod, directly into Edirol R09 plug in power.

Source #2: RTI/Intricon RT-1200 capsule.  This is a rectangular capsule, 6mm x 8mm, 2mm thick, with a 2mm diameter hole in the front face.  This *may* be related to the Lectrosonics and/or Tram mics.  Manufactured in Singapore.  These were glued flat on the front of my hat, a bit more forward than the Senns (hence the different image).  Directly into Minidisc plug in power, mic in, low sens, pcm recording.

OK, my take on this is that I still prefer #1.  Not quite as open sounding (sounds a bit dark), but seems more clear in the mids.  Seems to have more detail, and more smoothness/warmth, hence just more pleasant to listen to.  Source #2 sounds more natural right away, but I don't think there is as much detail, and there is a very slight "edgyness" that I don't like.  I would liken these differences to Nevaton MKE400 (smooth) vs DPA 406x (edgy) mics, but less extreme.

Note: I'm not selling these mics (yet), but I choose to disclose sources in case anyone wants to purchase them.  Sennheiser KE4 (bare capsules) are approx $95 each, from Sennheiser industrial division.  The RTI/Intricon mics are available only in large quantities (25 or 50 pieces).  At this point I'm still searching for something better sounding than the RTI/Intricon, since I don't consider them an improvement over the Sennheisers.

  Richard

[run_run_run]

interesting 

[illconditioned]

OK, I posted a second (longer) Jill Barber clip, includes a song by her brother, Matthew.

I posted the Sennheiser version, because I like this sound better.

Enjoy...
  Richard

[Outrageous]

Interesting about the mics.  Nice recording--thanks.